Older drivers should not be prosecuted if they run red lights, drive too slowly or go in the wrong motorway lane, experts say.
Well, why the hell not? Of course, it's a new government proposal, you can tell by the way the 'experts' are suggesting something cretinous:
The Older Drivers Task Force said in a report that assessments of driving skills should be offered to all motorists aged 70 and above who are caught committing offences.
Drivers are assessed by specially qualified occupational therapists and driving instructors.
When someone is found to be unsafe behind the wheel, a report is sent to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency who considers whether to revoke their licence.
Rather than prosecuting them in the courts, like everyone else?
Rolling out Fitness to Drive assessments across the UK would help to reduce deaths and serious injuries among older drivers, the report stated.
Would it help to reduce the deaths and serious injuries they cause, though? Shouldn't that be the main concern?
The report stated that older drivers do not pose a 'significant risk' to other road users but their 'relative frailty' means they are over-represented in serious crashes.
I wonder if Chris Thorold would agree with that assessment by the 'experts'?
11 comments:
I am quite sure that insurance companies must have data on age related fatal accidents. Let them publish it for all to see.
I presume the task force's (FFS) brief was "sit round that table until you come up with something stupid enough to get us in the Daily Mail and no coffee or biscuits until you do."
There are enough driving mistakes made every day without giving any slice of society a "get out of jail free" card and the insurance companies another excuse to increase their profits.
Now I'm not one to ring the police buy many years ago I was behind a car on a 60mph road that was all over the place and crossing the white line into oncoming traffic, there were several near misses, to be fair to the police they got there pretty quickly to stop him before the inevitable carnage.
I waited while the police dealt with it, and eventually the policeman walked over, how pissed was he I asked. Stone cold sober was the response.
Turns out it was an 85 year old with arthritis so severe he couldn't hold the steering wheel, all he could manage was to lean on it with his arms !!!!
Odd that they include "driving too slowly" with running a red light or driving the wrong way down a motorway. The latter two being illegal, the first not necessarily so. Who decides what constitutes "too slowly". (I admit I find slow drivers immensely frustrating but concede that within legal limits everyone has a right to drive at the speed they are comfortable with. So far.)
Agreed. There is however the forty fiver driver who drives at 45mph whatever the speed limit or the conditions might be.
Insurance companies are generally smart financially, they understand risk. For the same car, they would charge a 70-year-old £200, for a 17-year-old it's £2,000. Accepting their usual measure of rank profiteering, that's still pretty good evidence of the relative claims cost, a good indicator of who's considered the safest drivers.
As we all age, we have a responsibility to ensure that we can still drive safely, the vast majority do that, usually restricting their range and types of driving to stay within their changing capacities, eventually stopping altogether. There is no statistical justification for the government interfering with that process.
At the age of 84, I have just renewed my driving licence.I was assessed by my Doctor and am pleased to say that I still have all my faculties.Here in my part of New Zealand.the problem is at the other end of the age scale, there are several recent cases of young,single men killing themselves and their mates in single car crashes.
"...There is no statistical justification for the government interfering with that process."
That statement really applies to just about everything that the government feels the need to stick its nose into.
"Let them publish it for all to see"
I think we can all tell, just by comparing premiums...
"I presume the task force's (FFS) brief was "sit round that table until you come up with something stupid enough to get us in the Daily Mail and no coffee or biscuits until you do.""
I think that must be SWI for all 'task forces' and 'thinktanks', lately...
"Turns out it was an 85 year old with arthritis so severe he couldn't hold the steering wheel, all he could manage was to lean on it with his arms !!!!"
😲
"Who decides what constitutes "too slowly"."
An experienced traffic officer? Too bad we don't have enough.
"As we all age, we have a responsibility to ensure that we can still drive safely...."
Yes, and once there would be a plethora of people to assist - the local bobby, the GP, your neighbours. All gone, now. We call it 'progress'.
"Here in my part of New Zealand.the problem is at the other end of the age scale, there are several recent cases of young,single men killing themselves and their mates in single car crashes."
And we're no different, except for the prevalence of the fairer sex lately in such acccidents.
"That statement really applies to just about everything that the government feels the need to stick its nose into."
True!
The problem with slow drivers is they frustrate those behind them to the point of attempting unsafe overtaking. We have an 8 mile 50mph stretch (which can comfortably be taken at 70 in good conditions) around here which is notorious for head on collisions where peeps try to overtake someone doing 25 on a sunny day.
My understanding of the insurance industry is that companies make virtually nothing from the premiums themselves; they just about cover costs and payouts so should be a very good indicator of risk. The profit comes from investing the premiums and the resulting returns on that 'borrowed' capital
Post a Comment